What we mean when we talk about "supply chains" [was Re: Three steps we could take to make supply chain attacks a bit harder]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 2024-04-01 at 12:27 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > 
> > ii) the fact that this attack reinforces the painful truth that
> > sophisticated attackers *are* extremely interested in attacking the
> > supply chain of which we form a significant component
> 
> Can we please reframe it for what it actually is? This is an attack on
> open source communities. "Supply chain" implies a lot of things that
> simply don't exist in open source development. Almost the entirety of
> the sophistication of the attack was social engineering, not technical
> engineering. There *are* technical things to improve, for sure, but
> let's not try to make it sound like it's a wholly technical thing that
> can be solved with technical solutions exclusively. There are people
> and community problems that need addressing too.

This feels like a derail, so splitting it into a separate subthread.

Honestly, I don't see how the first part of your paragraph relates to
the second. I agree with a lot of the second part, but not the first.

I think we *are* part of a supply chain, regardless of any handwaving
about The Open Source Model. If you are part of producing stuff that
people use to do Real Life Stuff, you are part of a supply chain. You
might want to disclaim various responsibilities for various reasons,
but you still are. If you don't want to be part of a supply chain, stop
supplying stuff. I get the argument that there's a difference between
putting a plank over a stream with a CROSS AT YOUR OWN RISK sign and
charging people to cross your toll bridge, but there are *also* some
similarities.

I agree that the social engineering aspects of this attack were very
significant (though I disagree that was "almost the entirety of the
sophistication" - the technical elements were also pretty
sophisticated). But I don't see why that leads to bikeshedding about
whether this is a "supply chain" attack or not. Why is a "social
engineering attack" not a supply chain attack, but a "technical attack"
is?
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux